Implied terms again, or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks & Spencer

James Fisher

doi:10.1177/1473779516657709

Implied terms again, or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks & Spencer

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

Abstract

This comment summarizes and reflects on the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd. It presents the leading judgment as an attempt to obstruct the development of a welcome new understanding of implication of contract terms as an exercise in contractual construction. This attempt is unconvincing, requiring an unduly timid reading of Lord Hoffmann’s influential judgment in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	236-241
Journal	Common Law World Review
Volume	45
Issue number	2-3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/1473779516657709
Publication status	Published - 2016
Externally published	Yes

Access to Document

10.1177/1473779516657709

Cite this

@article{8954e01722f447cf8127b42d6bcb2bb3,

title = "Implied terms again, or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks \& Spencer",

abstract = "This comment summarizes and reflects on the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd. It presents the leading judgment as an attempt to obstruct the development of a welcome new understanding of implication of contract terms as an exercise in contractual construction. This attempt is unconvincing, requiring an unduly timid reading of Lord Hoffmann{\textquoteright}s influential judgment in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd.",

author = "James Fisher",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.1177/1473779516657709",

language = "English",

volume = "45",

pages = "236--241",

journal = "Common Law World Review",

publisher = "Vathek Publishing",

number = "2-3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implied terms again, or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks & Spencer

AU - Fisher, James

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - This comment summarizes and reflects on the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd. It presents the leading judgment as an attempt to obstruct the development of a welcome new understanding of implication of contract terms as an exercise in contractual construction. This attempt is unconvincing, requiring an unduly timid reading of Lord Hoffmann’s influential judgment in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd.

AB - This comment summarizes and reflects on the decision of the United Kingdom Supreme Court in Marks and Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Company (Jersey) Ltd. It presents the leading judgment as an attempt to obstruct the development of a welcome new understanding of implication of contract terms as an exercise in contractual construction. This attempt is unconvincing, requiring an unduly timid reading of Lord Hoffmann’s influential judgment in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom Ltd.

U2 - 10.1177/1473779516657709

DO - 10.1177/1473779516657709

M3 - Comment/debate

VL - 45

SP - 236

EP - 241

JO - Common Law World Review

JF - Common Law World Review

IS - 2-3

ER -

Implied terms again, or how Lord Hoffmann got treated in Marks & Spencer

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this